The patch below was submitted to be applied to the 3.14-stable tree. I fail to see how this patch meets the stable kernel rules as found at Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt.
I could be totally wrong, and if so, please respond to <[email protected]> and let me know why this patch should be applied. Otherwise, it is now dropped from my patch queues, never to be seen again. thanks, greg k-h ------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------ >From 85cbe1f88cb189322e3e4ef98816c19ab12161ea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kent Overstreet <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 13:44:06 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] bcache: Fix another compiler warning on m68k Use a bigger hammer this time Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <[email protected]> Cc: linux-stable <[email protected]> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/bset.c b/drivers/md/bcache/bset.c index 3f74b4b0747b..545416415305 100644 --- a/drivers/md/bcache/bset.c +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/bset.c @@ -23,8 +23,8 @@ void bch_dump_bset(struct btree_keys *b, struct bset *i, unsigned set) for (k = i->start; k < bset_bkey_last(i); k = next) { next = bkey_next(k); - printk(KERN_ERR "block %u key %li/%u: ", set, - (uint64_t *) k - i->d, i->keys); + printk(KERN_ERR "block %u key %u/%u: ", set, + (unsigned) ((u64 *) k - i->d), i->keys); if (b->ops->key_dump) b->ops->key_dump(b, k); -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
